Beaumont council votes to make truancy illegal, 5 February 2008, Press-Enterprise, Riverside, California — “The first ordinance states that it is unlawful for any juvenile enrolled in school full time to remain at a public place or establishment without the consent of the owner or manager during the hours, and on days, when school is in session. It gives students 30 minutes to get to school in the morning and 30 minutes after school to get home, Coe said after the meeting. The ordinance makes some exceptions, including if the child is home-schooled, …”

Illinois:

A “chill” on the First Amendment and minimal interference of parental authority, 7 February 2008, Corn and Oil — “In Arthur last week at the homeschool support group meeting, there was discussion about daytime curfews. There have been several passed. It’s hard to keep track of which Illinois towns and cities homeschoolers (and others not on The Public School Schedule), might have to prove they’re legally walking the streets or playing in their front yard.”

Ohio:

Daytime curfew, 6 February 2008, South Elyria Block Watch — “Please be advised that there will be a Public Utilities, Safety, & Environment meeting at 6:00pm on Wednesday evening, February 13, 2008 to discuss the matter of a daytime curfew for 17 and under.”

In that last one, I found a paragraph in which I concluded that the wrong people were locked up.

In Robinson v. Board of Regents of Eastern Kentucky University, a female student challenged the curfew, arguing that it was unconstitutional because it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.81 The Sixth Circuit upheld the district court’s decision that a curfew that imposes restrictions on women does not constitute an equal protection violation.82 The court reasoned that sex-based classifications are often upheld and explained that equal protection does not require identical treatment.83 The curfew regulation survived the Sixth Circuit’s rational relation test because the state interest in the discriminatory statute was safety: Women are more likely to be attacked and less likely to defend themselves.84 The Sixth Circuit’s safety justification which permitted curfews targeting women effectively kept some young women under lock and key as a precaution against the improper behavior of men.

The women weren’t doing anything wrong, so it should have been the men who were subjected to a curfew. Don’t punish some people for being victims, punish the perps. But I digress.

Thanks, ladies. Nice stack of links to slog through and add to the collection. If these curfews aren’t contested, it will continue even though the courts seem to be striking it down when it’s pursued. The IN Hodgkins case was stopped with 1st Amendment right violations. The 7th Court of Appeals didn’t get to the 14th Amendment violations since one amendment was enough.
So why are our legislators and city leaders passing these school administration requested laws if there is such an important question as constitutionality?
Because they can.